pivot-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Chris Bartlett <cbartlet...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Performance and frame resizing patches
Date Tue, 03 Jan 2012 10:44:16 GMT

As Sandro said, the team's ability to dedicate time to Pivot has been
reduced a little over the last year, but as you can see from the
closed tickets, we are still progressing, albeit slowly.

Sandro has also done good work looking to automate the builds so that
we might be able to provide snapshot jars/zips for the community.
This started as a result of a member of the community doing a little
research to getting things going.

If you have the time, please contribute to discussions on the mailing
lists and help out others who may have questions.  The mailing list
has been quiet recently as only a few committers have really been
replying to posts.  We welcome every bit of help that the community is
willing to give, and the extra discussion will help to demonstrate
that Pivot is not dead, but in need of a few more people to donate a
little time and effort.

This last paragraph applies to anyone who might read this.  Please
join in, make your opinions known, and help to shape the future of


2012/1/3 Sandro Martini <sandro.martini@gmail.com>:
> 2011 has been an important year for Pivot, but the team has been
> restructured, and we haven't anymore someone working full time on it, and
> last, there are other parts of the project (other than code) that require a
> review.
> These are main reasons for our delay. I understand the vision from the
> outside, but the project is alive.
> Bye,
> Sandro
> Il giorno 01/gen/2012 14:56, "Piotr Kołaczkowski"
> <p.kolaczkowski@sages.com.pl> ha scritto:
>> W dniu 31.12.2011 16:44, Sandro Martini pisze:
>>> Hi Piotr,
>>> as your other question, we will look at it just after the 2.0.1
>>> released (at least me, maybe others can have some time before).
>>>> Don't know why my previous proposition of memoizing the buffer has been
>>>> applied only to VolatileImage and not also to BufferedImage. :(
>>> Because we wasn't sure that the fix was good in all cases (if I
>>> remember well, Chris had some problems in one application), and with
>>> an important maintenance release as 2.0.1 (we are working on it since
>>> January 2011) and many applications based on it from many companies
>>> ... we chose a safer approach, but we will restart to look at it in
>>> 2.0.2 .
>>> Thank you for the patch for now, and Happy New Year even to you.
>>> Sandro
>> Ok, no problem.  Go ahead with the 2.0.1 release without my patches.
>> I'd like to see bugfixing releases more often. Almost one year for a 2.0
>> -> 2.0.1 is very very long, and it actually forces us to use versions from
>> trunk. Really, from outside it looks like the project is dead.
>> Regards,
>> Piotr
>> --
>> Piotr Kołaczkowski
>> senior consultant
>> Sages Sp. z o.o.
>> ul. Wąwozowa 11
>> 02-796 Warszawa
>> t: +48 22 2035600
>> f: +48 22 2035601
>> m: +48 609618449

View raw message